Good luck man (in DE and NJ...). Of course, after the whole season, it was our match in April that cost my team the league and kept us out of districts. We were clearly overmatched against you guys, so it's hard to be upset about losing that one, but losing in a 3-2 match always bothers the hell out of me.

Did you see who won the PA districts? LOL. That team is stacked top to bottom with ringers.

In NJ we just don't have the depth we need. We got a solid 8 but you saw how many courts we defaulted over the second half of the season. At least we should not default any this weekend. I am curious to see who will come out of NJ .. there is always a team of ringers. Unfortunately, most of our ringers went with the Philly team instead.

The Delaware team is solid. We finished undefeated without dropping a court over the last 5 weeks. We have a good core of ten players and have another 2 that are dependable. Unfortunately, we do not have any self rated out of level players. Our next closest competitor has two self rated dudes he has been hiding. One has bageled all 4 guys he has played but only against the weak sisters. The other is a rising high school senior. The captain has not brought them out against any of the stud teams so I am curious to see how good his ringers actually are.

In NJ we just don't have the depth we need. We got a solid 8 but you saw how many courts we defaulted over the second half of the season. At least we should not default any this weekend. I am curious to see who will come out of NJ .. there is always a team of ringers. Unfortunately, most of our ringers went with the Philly team instead.

The Delaware team is solid. We finished undefeated without dropping a court over the last 5 weeks. We have a good core of ten players and have another 2 that are dependable. Unfortunately, we do not have any self rated out of level players. Our next closest competitor has two self rated dudes he has been hiding. One has bageled all 4 guys he has played but only against the weak sisters. The other is a rising high school senior. The captain has not brought them out against any of the stud teams so I am curious to see how good his ringers actually are.

In NJ, it's the team from the Central B flight. One of their ringers got DQ'd, but they have a whole roster of them. The South team is pretty good, too, but I don't know if they will be able to overcome the self-rates.

In NJ, it's the team from the Central B flight. One of their ringers got DQ'd, but they have a whole roster of them. The South team is pretty good, too, but I don't know if they will be able to overcome the self-rates.

Well the team from the south did over come their ringers and have advanced. Dont know if that is good or bad.

Our team was undefeated on the season. We played the team that only barely lost to us during the season in the finals. They brought out two more ringers for the finals. A kid that plays number 1 for West Chester University and a highly rated high school kid that looks like he is 12.

Anywho, during the finals our college kid beat their college kid so that was unexpected and a bonus.

The match was tied 2-2 and our court was the deciding court. We were playing the HS kid and the Russian, a 60 year old solid doubles player. We were on serve in the first when all of the other courts finished. I asked and was told that our court was the decider. I made sure my partner and our opponents knew what the stakes were. We did not lose a game after that winning 7-5, 6-0.

I definitely got the sense the old timer faded physically from the heat and the kid did not handle the pressure of having 100 people cheering each point in a deciding match. That and the fact I think we hit about 1000 volleys and overheads at the kid feet as the Russians returns started to float.

In any event, I felt like this weekend was a victory of good over evil, computer rated over sandbagging ...

Our team was undefeated on the season. We played the team that only barely lost to us during the season in the finals. They brought out two more ringers for the finals. A kid that plays number 1 for West Chester University and a highly rated high school kid that looks like he is 12.

Anywho, during the finals our college kid beat their college kid so that was unexpected and a bonus.

The match was tied 2-2 and our court was the deciding court. We were playing the HS kid and the Russian, a 60 year old solid doubles player. We were on serve in the first when all of the other courts finished. I asked and was told that our court was the decider. I made sure my partner and our opponents knew what the stakes were. We did not lose a game after that winning 7-5, 6-0.

I definitely got the sense the old timer faded physically from the heat and the kid did not handle the pressure of having 100 people cheering each point in a deciding match. That and the fact I think we hit about 1000 volleys and overheads at the kid feet as the Russians returns started to float.

In any event, I felt like this weekend was a victory of good over evil, computer rated over sandbagging ...

Thanks again

Congrats. Nice job. The Central B team had another of theri ringers DQ'd the last match before districts, so they were down a couple of their top ringers.

Remember at the beginning of the season when you posted that thread about wanting to find HS & college kids eligible to self-rate at 4.0 for a run through nationals? At sectionals, you'll get a chance to play the team that did get the self-rated kids capable of winning nationals - the same team from Philly that you played for last year and quit. Karma has such a cruel sense of irony sometimes. Good luck.

Our team was undefeated on the season. We played the team that only barely lost to us during the season in the finals. They brought out two more ringers for the finals. A kid that plays number 1 for West Chester University and a highly rated high school kid that looks like he is 12.

Anywho, during the finals our college kid beat their college kid so that was unexpected and a bonus.

The match was tied 2-2 and our court was the deciding court. We were playing the HS kid and the Russian, a 60 year old solid doubles player. We were on serve in the first when all of the other courts finished. I asked and was told that our court was the decider. I made sure my partner and our opponents knew what the stakes were. We did not lose a game after that winning 7-5, 6-0.

I definitely got the sense the old timer faded physically from the heat and the kid did not handle the pressure of having 100 people cheering each point in a deciding match. That and the fact I think we hit about 1000 volleys and overheads at the kid feet as the Russians returns started to float.

In any event, I felt like this weekend was a victory of good over evil, computer rated over sandbagging ...

Thanks again

ok, so i need a clarification here.
You are saying that your team beat a team with '3 out of level self-rates'? How's that possible that they are out of level if your, I'm assuming computer rated, players did beat them? wouldn't that by definition almost mean that the other team's players are in fact --not-- out of level?
Or the other possibility is that your team is made up of at least the same, or more, number of out-of-level players?
Since you did beat them at least twice than it was no accident. Please clarify....

ok, so i need a clarification here.
You are saying that your team beat a team with '3 out of level self-rates'? How's that possible that they are out of level if your, I'm assuming computer rated, players did beat them? wouldn't that by definition almost mean that the other team's players are in fact --not-- out of level?
Or the other possibility is that your team is made up of at least the same, or more, number of out-of-level players?
Since you did beat them at least twice than it was no accident. Please clarify....

Dude, seriously, are you new to league tennis? Sandbagging out-of-level ringers can only be found on opposing teams. The best players on your own team are better characterized as strong-for-level warriors who have improved a lot during the season through hard work and dedication.

Our team ... every one is computer rated for at least 4 seasons. We have won our district 3 years in a row. Last year half our team was elevated to 4.5 at early start rating time and then moved back down at year end rating time. Our section coordinator said our section representative was not competitive at Nationals last year so they dialed every one back. In short, we have a very good completely computer rated team. Additionally, no one ever leaves our team except for injury.

Their team ... A team of nomads. We play in Delaware which is close to three other districts. Their captain is not a nice person ... by all accounts. There is a reason that even though we have won 3 years running, every spectator not associated with his team wanted us to win. The goal in playoffs was anybody but "Earl". His players rarely play for him for more than 1 or 2 seasons because of this. However, what he does exceptionally well is recruit new to league tennis folks or players from neighboring districts that do not know him (yet).

Of course the players he recruits are good. His three self rates were as follows:

Player 1: 4-0 at 1st singles against mid 4.0s - total game score (48-6). He did not play at districts this weekend ... captain was overheard saying he already had 2 strikes and was saving him for sectionals. Not sure how he would know this but apparently he has a birdie.

Player number 2: 2-0 at 1st singles against above avg 4.0s .. total game score (24-. He also did not play this weekend because he has entered the marines.

Player number 3: 6-1 in doubles. 18 year old rising HS senior ... he was the kid who played on my court. He lost to us by 4 breaks in his last match so he probably will be a 4.0 C next year, so by definition not an out of level self rate. However, my partner and I were both early start 4.5's last year and were undefeated this season 12-0 in the district and this kid was much better than us. If his partner had been stronger they should have won.

I think that if either of those other two had played we likely would have lost ... it was that close.